The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1887-07-28
A SUPERB ARGUMENT.
Mayor Robertson on the Prohi-
bitlon Amendment.
Facts and Figures Thrown Like
Hot Shot Into the Enemy's
Camp.
From Sundays Dti VI

city, spoke by invitation, on the prohlbl-
ton question, at the court house, last
night. The audience which heard Colonel
Robertson was not as large as the merit of
his speech deserved, but those who listened
to his sound and logical reasoning, and his
mastery array of facts and figures, felt
themselves fully repaid for having braved
the heat of the evening to hear him.
introduced by Hon. Chas. R. Gibson,
Col. Robertson said that he spoke from
the standpoint of one who had no person
al interest in the traffic. He neither
bought, sold nor used liquor, and if he had
a relative on earth who was engaged in
the business or in danger from the use of
liquor he was unaware of it,. He was not
disinterested, however, in the issues in
volved in the proposition to be submitted,
because be believed it to be wrong In
principle, and that its adoption and en-
forcement will be impolitic, oppressive
and hurtful to the prosperity of the state.
He then proceeded to discuss the effect
that prohibition will have on the revenue
and taxation of the state. He urged the
Importance of careful study of this fea-
ture of the question. 1t is admitted that
revenues will be decreased, but the
claim is asserted that it will be so small
the economic conditions of the state will
not be affected. 1t is admitted that the
amendment will cut off about $500, 900 of
revenue from the state per annum, and
like amount from the cities and counties.
Thus will be taken from the people nearly
$1,O0O,O00, and yet the reformers say this
won't materially affect the revenue. The
speaker addressed himself quite literally
to the official and unofficial statements of
ex-Comptroller Swain, which he compared
closely, showing their variance and accept
ing that contained in his report, which he
said was the statement of sworn officer,
while his subsequent statement
was that of partisan.
In his (Swain's) report, he says an ad
valorem tax of one fourth of one per cent,
in addition to all the revenue from occu-
patton taxes and other sources, is neces-
sary to support the state government and
"pay as you CO. In the second state
ment of the comptroller, made as a
prohibitionist, and not as an officer, is
that the surplus of revenue, produced
under the present assessment, will cover
any loss that will arise from the doing
away of the liquor license. Of the two
statements, the speaker preferred to ac-
.cept that of the sworn officer, rather than
that of the partisan prohibitionist.
Colonel Robertson then proceeded to
make an elaborate discussion upon the
question of the states revenue and taxa
ton, and the effect which the adoption
of prohibition would have in working a
decrease in property values in income to
to the state, county and municipal gov
ernments. Upon this subject Mayor
Robertson was very elaborate, entering
fully into the details of the subject. The
figures presented were taken from official
documents, and cannot therefore be sub
iected to the charge of manipulation. He
showed by the figures which he presented
that there would be a shortage n the
revenues for 1887 and 1888, if the licenses
on liquors is left out, of $6O1 1858. 90.
The expenses of the government must be
maintained, and if this amount is cut off
where is the deficit to be made good?
Public interests will have to
suffer, or the lands and farms
of Texas will have to be taxed to
supply the shortage. Travis county de-
rives from this license 1925 annually,
and the city of Austin $4,000, while the
state collects in Travis county $19,550.
Travis county cannot afford to lose this
1925. She owes debts that must be
paid. Cut this source of revenue off, and
improvements will have to stop or an in
crease of taxes made necessary. Do the
people want this?
The next phase of the subject discussed
was the aims and object of government,
under which the personal rights of citi-
zens were argued not to come from the
general government The government
IOr ia that
already exist. The right of life,
the pursuit of happiness, are
above the power of government. The
government depends for its very existence
upon the consent of the governed. The
people support the government and not
the government the people. But it is now
being denied that this is government of
the people, by the people and for the
people. It is even claimed that we have
no rights except such as are extended to
us by government. This doctrine is ad-
vanced by prohibitionist statesmen and
by preachers, who for the first time in the
history of the state have gone into poll
tics. The speaker characterized it as a
dangerous theory. 1t involves fiat de-
NAL of the right of personal liberty, and
impeaches the power of the moral forces
to regulate mans moral conduct.
The cry that prohibition is moral and
not political question was next taken
up by Mayor Robertson, who in emphatic
language, presenting solid reasons, showed
the assertion to be fallacy of the grossest
character The claim of the prohibition
lists, that the proposed amendment does
not prohibit man from manufacturing
wine or whisky for his own use, or to give
to his neighbor, was held up before the
light of eminent legal interpretations of
construction, and was shown to be as false
in reason as the morality dodge, SO fire.
quently harped upon. The speaker next
considered the question, "Will Prohibition
Prohibit" and demonstrated in clear
terms that it will not.
Col Robertson then, in turn, discussed
the damages to property by the adoption
of the amendment, and the wisdom of con-
trolling the liquor traffic by regulating
rather than attempting prohibition,
which admittedly will not prohibit.
In conclusion, the speaker presented
some exceedingly interesting facts anent
the traffic in liquor in the prohibition
states OF Maine, Kansas and Iowa. He
compared the Wanted prosperity of those
states with that of Texas, and demon
strated that Texas had progressed IN